Waiver of instalment bond exigibility clause upheld; creditor's later suit for the full debt was not maintainable.

A creditor may waive an instalment bond's exigibility clause where the clause is for the creditor's benefit and the bond does not clearly exclude that privilege. By suing only for defaulted instalments, the creditor was treated as having elected that waiver, and Article 75 of the Limitation Act, 1908 was applied on the footing that it recognises an existing right of waiver rather than creating one. On Order 2, Rule 2 CPC, the court noted that exigibility can give rise to more than one possible cause of action, but once the creditor elects to proceed on one basis, the later suit for the whole amount is not maintainable on the alternative basis.

---

---

Issues: Whether the creditor could waive the exigibility clause in the instalment bond after suing only for defaulted instalments, and whether the subsequent suit for the whole amount was barred by limitation or by Order 2, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: The creditor's act of suing for only the defaulted instalments was treated as an exercise of the option to waive the clause making the whole debt immediately payable on default. Article 75 of the Limitation Act, 1908 recognises waiver where the creditor is entitled to exercise that privilege, and the provision does not itself create the right but assumes that such a right exists under the ordinary law. The Court held that, unless the bond clearly takes away the privilege, the clause is ordinarily for the creditor's benefit and may be waived. On the question of Order 2, Rule 2, the Court held that when exigibility arises there may be two possible causes of action, but only one can ultimately be pursued once the option is exercised.

Conclusion: The creditor was entitled to waive the exigibility clause, the waiver was effectively made, and the revision therefore failed.

---